Josh Sawyer Pillars of Eternity 2 Tease Thread

[Karkarov]

Guys you don't really understand publishers.  If Obsidian can prove their game is a guaranteed profit return (which I think it is safe to say an Eternity sequel probably will be) publishers will be fine with giving them free rein.  As long as they stay on release schedule anyway.  Publishers generally don't care about video games, they care about profits.  They aren't going to tell you "no this game must be turn based" most of the time, because they don't care about your game or it's mechanics.

That said, like in all walks of life some publishers are stupid.  They want everyone to make their game more like Call of Duty or something.  We are talking about Paradox though... they release stuff like Europa Universalis, Magicka, and Mount and Blade.... do you really think they are going to interfere with Obsidian's design to give it more mass appeal?  If you do, well.... you're wrong, and there is no other way to put it.

Look no further than Tyranny, no kickstarter, supported solely by Paradox, and it is a fine game that is basically just like Eternity only maybe a little better in some respects mechanically.

[SkySlam]

I'm all in for crowdfunding, because I came too late to the party during the first campaign, therefore I got my own egoistical reasons to wish for a second kickstarter. I really want to be backer this time (silver tier up) and show my support and love for the series, I'm already saving some money!

 

Considering that PoE was more similar to BG than BG2 in both scope and exploration, I suppose the vast majority of the playerbase is waiting for the obvious jump: the grand, intricate, boundless BG2 spiritual successor!

What I mean is: the basis of the series are pretty solid at this point, I don't think a Kickstarter campaign could harm Pillars in any way.

 

I believe that a game like "the new BG2" takes years to make, and let's not even discuss the resources! I'd be more than happy if Obsidian chose to call their fans for help instead of a powerful publisher/company which could alienate the series from its roots. We already got many dire examples of that in the past: Heroes of Might and Magic in the hands of Ubisoft, or the evolution (involution) from DA:O to the second title.

 

I also disagree with the comparison to Tyranny: I find the game to be a little gem, and I like it quite a lot, but the more I play it, the more I desire to start a new run of Pillars.

Tyranny feels a lot more MMOish and casual than PoE: cooldown skills, reduced party size, no FF etc. Of course there are also some very interesting ideas, and I think Obsidian could take the best of both worlds should they decide to confront with the fans instead of choosing the easiest, but more dangerous way of developing PoE2 without players' feedbacks.

[nipsen]

Guys you don't really understand publishers.  If Obsidian can prove their game is a guaranteed profit return (which I think it is safe to say an Eternity sequel probably will be) publishers will be fine with giving them free rein.

 

The profit-return argument was not the reason why Josh's ruleset - that he is apparently pitching a second time now - was scrapped for PoE. It was a couple of people here convincing themselves that MMO-gameplay was "objectively more fun", to quote a certain community moderator.

 

So Obsidian had a choice between a system made by a veteran crpg-developer who plays pen and paper games, who proved the system could be tied into the overall design elements in practice as well as on paper. And between a system created by adding random things together that forum-people thought sounded good.

 

And Obsidian went with the forum-committee system.

 

So what is the reason for thinking Obsidian won't make the same choice again? What you're suggesting here is that if the forum-committee system they were "forced" to use is a success, over the scrapped system that actually made sense - then that will give Obsidian confidence to spite their new fans who love the forum-committe system.

 

Wouldn't it make sense for Obsidian to continue with the MMO-like system with cooldowns coupled with micromanagement that replaced strategy - if that was a success? Like at least 2 forumers will claim at any point. After all, these 2 forumers are in a uniform majority that knows exactly what they want, even if it's very unspecific and flimsy when it comes to detail. So what possible other route could Obsidian go with their next game? After all, the fans have spoken. They want MMO-like rules with dials and numbers that have only cosmetic significance, where "DPS" replaces all other considerations. So that's how all "gamers" like their games, objectively speaking - I thought we had already decided on that discussion a year ago.

[Karkarov]

And Obsidian went with the forum-committee system.

No they didn't.  If Josh had made his case for whatever feature to his higher ups, sold them on it, and they agreed it was a great idea, nothing said on this forum would have kept it out of the game.  The repair system didn't vanish because of forum spew, it vanished because they couldn't find a way to make it do what they wanted and not feel like a tacked on element that didn't really serve a purpose.

 

You can voice your opinion on this forum, Obsidian might consider it, they may even go with an idea very similar to something you post, but don't kid yourself.  Obsidian is making the call, not the forums.  You are offering feedback and suggestions, nothing more.

Edited November 15, 2016 by Karkarov

[nipsen]

You are offering feedback and suggestions, nothing more.

 

Fine. Obsidian took a suggestion from the internet to scuttle a working ruleset, that would cause a lot of extra work, cause a delay, in addition to being the most boring system a role-playing game has ever seen. And went with it.

 

Obsidian made the call, and it was an impossibly bad one.

 

Specially considering the suggestions came from a very narrow audience. Who later denied having had anything to do with it, and deleted their 50-page work that the game followed slavishly after the "tweaking" process was over. So no one would criticise either Obsidian for telling 400k kickstarter people to **** off based on the feedback of two people on their internet forums. Or the two trolls for having been involved in scuttling the game.

 

But yes, it was Obsidian who made the call, and they ****ed up.

 

Happy?

[Fenixp]

Well a game made by a "forum-committee" led to a game which now seems to be well-liked by majority of its players, so it can't be considered much of a fluke-up, can it? Tyranny was made entirely without input of the community and the combat already seems to be quite widely criticized. I mean sure, Obsidian could have implemented nipsen-based combat, but they're probably much better off implementing whatever people want to play.

[nipsen]

Well a game made by a "forum-committee" led to a game which now seems to be well-liked by majority of its players, so it can't be considered much of a fluke-up, can it? Tyranny was made entirely without input of the community and the combat already seems to be quite widely criticized.

They're identical, save for some cosmetic changes.

 

Not even the kindest review for PoE will bring up the rules and the gameplay-mechanics as it's strong suit, other than how it reminds people of the most annoying parts of Baldur's Gate (that is, the micromanagement bs and the missing turns, idiotic interrupt mechanics that only work in pnp, and the powercreep and potion/healing inflation and rest-spam thanks to the massive frequency of battles in a video-game rpg compared to the pnp games the d&d ruleset is actually intended for - all issues that a certain games-developer talked much about solving ahead of PoE's launch).

 

Your turn, Fenix. What is your version of this, hmm?

 

 

I mean sure, Obsidian could have implemented nipsen-based combat, but they're probably much better off implementing whatever people want to play.

So who are "people", Fenix? I wanted a seasoned game-developer to try something creative without having a publisher hanging over their shoulder. And was sold - like many other kickstarters - on Josh's fairly specific introduction to this system as the development of the title started to take shape. Most of the people who participated on the forum then would say: "great, this looks good, let me know when the game comes out".

 

When I played this in the beta, I was delighted they managed to get it to work.

 

Now, I didn't make any demands, complained that Obsidian "betrayed the isometric rpg creed", or blew up over how Joshua Sawyer, the worst game-designer known to man, was allowed near a game. I didn't run around on the forum screaming that the game was "broken", because it didn't have cooldown abilities. And I did sure as hell not insist, while threatening to ban people who disagreed with me, that the only good rpg ever made was Diablo 3.

 

What I said was that Obsidian shouldn't be so ****ing stupid as to throw away the existing system over some ****wit super-fans on the internet.

 

So no, this wasn't "nipsen-based combat", that the "internet" didn't want. This was Josh Sawyer's many times previously announced system for the game we helped kickstart.

 

But some **** with a youtube channel didn't like it, because it wasn't based on coin-flipping and 50% chances enough, like "real rpgs" - so **** everyone else. And a tiny little core of wankers on the internet hated it. And then somehow, for whatever reason I cannot understand, Obsidian pounced on this as an excuse to make a Diablo 3 clone - which I suppose is what they REALLY wanted to make all along, so they could give Josh the finger and cut his existing system to bits.

 

And note - there's no abstract character over this system that was technically impossible to implement. The replacement system did, on the other hand, have multiple areas where it introduces specific and very unnecessary balancing issues. That as you know, PoE still has, a year after release. I wasn't the only person to say so when whoever idiot made the decision to throw the old system out the window. But you told them all to **** off.

 

And now you have the balls to invent the story about how the "alternative" system that didn't suck was my invention, invented from scratch after the beta launched I suppose. And something only I wanted? An exclusive "nipsen-system". While what Obsidian went with, on the other hand, was a widely wished for system that "everyone" wanted.

 

You lying sack of ****. Go to hell, and take your 10 other "forum-majority" **** with you. I know you all read this forum, so **** you. You have done nothing else but manage to exploit a developer who takes you as seriously as you take yourselves, to give you personally the attention that you don't deserve any more than the other very high number of backers who simply said: "great, let's see what you can do".

 

What they didn't say, like me, was "and by all means, do not attempt to be creative if it annoys one ****ing youtuber on the internet, because what we really want is something bland and samey that is exactly as cumbersome as the original Black-Isle attempt to translate the d&d pnp rules - which we all know was perfect and ideal!".

 

There's a reason why we didn't say that. And there's a reason why people who say: "I will trust the developer to do their best" will not spam the ****ing forum for months about, for example, of how Josh Sawyer is "a laughingstock of developers evrywhere lol".

 

But you still somehow collectively managed to give this **** weight, in the absence of an internet mob decending on the forum to say: "No, please don't remove the system we were sold on through the initial 6 months after the kickstarter, because I really suspect that this is something that will happen - which is why I signed up on the forum".

 

You stupid, ****ing idiots.

 

There. All better now.

[Gfted1]

Now now, nipsen, people are allowed to have differing opinions. Do try to keep the personal attacks out of things.

 

And D3 is way better.

[Nonek]

In order to promote harjmony in the thread i'd just like to say one thing: Sensuki.

[Gfted1]

Oh great, now youve done it!

[Fenixp]

-snip-

You stupid, ****ing idiots.

 

There. All better now.

Edited November 15, 2016 by Fenixp

[JerekKruger]

... Obsidian pounced on this as an excuse to make a Diablo 3 clone...

 

Bwuh?

[nipsen]

Now now, nipsen, people are allowed to have differing opinions. Do try to keep the personal attacks out of things.

 

And D3 is way better.

In other words, you will allow any opinion other than "I wonder what Obsidian will make without the backseat developer experts". Which is hilarious out of left field crazy talk.

 

What I'm asking for, Gifted, is for for example you to explain why Diablo 3 is relevant when it comes to the ruleset in an rpg. Rather than contradicting whatever is said and insisting that ten ditto-posts on the internet makes any discussion unnecessary. As, by ten ditto-posts and a short statement, the truth about all is revealed. That you feel this explanation is not needed, because of your superior opinion and ten ditto-posts, is of course noted.

 

That's just fine. I don't begrudge anyone their opinions.

 

My problem here is the fact that people from Obsidian argued, privately to me, that the "common opinion on the forums seemed to be" your opinion. That person didn't say: "you know what - we just liked the things Gifted, MattMattt, Sensuki and friends said on the forum, and changed the game to fit with that because that was awesome!". They said: "we changed the system because "most people" wanted something else". Josh went on Gamescom(?) and said: "this wasn't what we started out with, but.." about the ruleset.

 

So as long as you say: "I think this, and this is why, and I speak for no one else but myself(and three other people on the internet agrees, apparently)", then it's fine.

 

The problem comes in when you as a moderator claims that there is no discussion to be had, as long as a forum-majority agrees with an unexplained statement. And this somehow finds itself into design-decisions for a game made on behalf of over 80k others, who have not been asked.

 

In fact, they were sold on something completely different, as pointed out. Your waffling on the forums here was not part of the kickstarter pitch. But you and a tiny little internet group managed to push through changes to the game after the beta came out anyway.

 

Congratulations, I guess. But call it what it was: a tiny part of the participants in the open beta - less than 1% of the 100 or so people who participated, had serious design-influence, that upended the system the kickstarter was sold on.

[Gfted1]

Haha, never miss an opportunity to miss the point. I never said this topic cant be discussed, I said try to act like an adult.

 

I know youve been at this point for several years now, and tbh, nobody cares. You can like PoE or dislike it, but what we dont need you doing is coming into threads and dropping personal insults. Perhaps you are STILL too enraged for rational thought or whatever but thats your problem. Feel free to vent your spleen wrt PoE and how the mechanics have done you wrong, but please stop with the personal insults.

 

And D3 is better cause I like it better.

[Infinitron]

 Epic grudge-holding ITT

[Karkarov]

Well a game made by a "forum-committee" led to a game which now seems to be well-liked by majority of its players, so it can't be considered much of a fluke-up, can it? Tyranny was made entirely without input of the community and the combat already seems to be quite widely criticized. I mean sure, Obsidian could have implemented nipsen-based combat, but they're probably much better off implementing whatever people want to play.

On this forum maybe.  Meanwhile steam says 87% of reviews are positive and considering there are almost 900 reviews that is a lot of "I like this game" versus this forums "I don't like it".

 

Personally I think the combat is fine.  Is it the greatest thing since sliced bread?  No.  But do you actually play isometric RPG's for the combat system?  I like work building, good plot, and replayability myself.

[Fenixp]

Let's put it this way: I loved combat and mechanics in Pillars of Eternity so much that I replayed the game multiple times for that. I really liked what I'm seeing with Tyranny in reactivity department tho, so I'll probably do multiple runs of that too. There are many reasons as to why would somebody replay a game, but I must say that overal, Tyranny feels like the weaker product of the two.

[nipsen]

Haha, never miss an opportunity to miss the point. I never said this topic cant be discussed, I said try to act like an adult.

 

I know youve been at this point for several years now, and tbh, nobody cares.

Oh, you're just adulting my socks off here now.

 

Meanwhile, Tale just messaged me and said I should ask mum forgiveness for using bad language, and not being nice to the other kids. Or else I will be sent to detention.

 

That this is where Obsidian maps out what is the "majority opinion" about their games is somewhere between comical and just tragic. 10 guys defined what "everyone" of the 80k kickstarters wanted.

 

And "nobody cares" if anyone disagrees with those 10 people. In fact, if you don't suck up to the mods, you're going to get banned. That's your focus-group, Josh.

[rheingold]

Funny thing about games and devs... They don't force you to buy their games or participate on forums at gunpoint. I get why some people don't like Pillars, or rather I understand how some people can hate something I actually like. Or vice versa. Obs certainly pay more attention to their fans than other devs which is actually a good thing, but to be honest making and buying games is a business. When it gets to the point that you start taking everything a developer does personally you probably need to take a step backwards.

I personally was very disappointed with DA I, but bitching and moaning about it is silly. The devs have chosen a different direction, and that's ok. I just won't buy their games again.

If people don't like Pillars just move on. It's not personal I promise.

Edited November 16, 2016 by rheingold

[Karkarov]

That this is where Obsidian maps out what is the "majority opinion" about their games is somewhere between comical and just tragic. 10 guys defined what "everyone" of the 80k kickstarters wanted.

 

 

And "nobody cares" if anyone disagrees with those 10 people. In fact, if you don't suck up to the mods, you're going to get banned. That's your focus-group, Josh.

So you are upset because the people who made the video game... actually made decisions about how to make the video game, and or actually made it?

 

Kickstarter is not a voting platform.  If you like a project you can back it, maybe you will get some input on that project.  Maybe your feedback will get through and slightly inform some design choices.  Most likely it won't, but at least you have the opportunity.  Thing is, if the team making the game didn't have their own ideas, gameplay, and mechanics concepts, the game would probably be a steaming pile of crap.

 

I actually don't mean this in a spiteful or mean way at all, but I do have to say it.  Backers like yourself are why many companies that have a "publisher" option are avoiding kickstarter now.  The constant never ending negative feedback loop does not do anything to help the developers, or your fellow backer.  Yet every major kickstarter that garners real money is buried in users like yourself that just have nothing but negative things to say.

 

As a backer you have the right to give feedback, and you should.  The feedback can't just be a constant negative bashing, with no balance, and nothing constructive to it.  Why?  Because people don't take, or listen to, that kind of feedback, and they shouldn't.  That isn't an Obsidian thing either, it isn't a kickstarter thing, it's "how the real world works" thing.

[Sedrefilos]

I don't understand people who get that mad over a freaking game. Especially when it is about mechanics and not their projection on real world subjects. Either they have prioritize what's important completely wrong or they get even more mad over serious subjects (that could be good or bad, depending ).

 

It's ok to participate in a forum, discussing and expressing your opinion, but when the game is out and you don't like, you just leave it and play something that you do like. Leave the forums to those who actually care about, don't ruin it because of some stupid personal (and one-sided!) grudge. I click to see what's new in the thread and I see a text wall of rants and curses. Almost 3 years after the game is out! Move on. Please.

[Drakortha]

Do you guys think POE2 will be like BG2 where you don't start from level 1 again but instead you begin at a higher level and you face higher level creatures in the game? I haven't finished POE yet, so idk how the story concludes. 

[Karkarov]

Do you guys think POE2 will be like BG2 where you don't start from level 1 again but instead you begin at a higher level and you face higher level creatures in the game? I haven't finished POE yet, so idk how the story concludes. 

If they bring back the watcher, maybe, but I honestly think they would be better off starting fresh with something new.

[rheingold]

The current system would have to be reworked extensively for a high level campaign... Some of the abilities/talents/spells are way overpowered. I'm not opposed to a high level campaign mind, and I like the direction Pillars went, its just the game was designed for low level campaigns as is, so it would mean a substantial amount of rebalancing and fine tuning.

[Sedrefilos]

As you finish the game, you already have a truckload of abilities, items etc. I doubt you'll continue to 20 more levels adding that many stuff on top. Most probably you'll start over another character or they'll rework the system and make you import choices but re-level-up your character with a new, slower 1-20 (or whatever the level cap was ) level system?

Starting over is a better choice imo, because new players and players that were away from the game for years, will have an easier time getting into it.